-
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN
NO. 03-06-00643-CR
Raymond Fernandez, Appellant
v.
The State of Texas, Appellee
FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY, 27TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. 56664, HONORABLE JOE CARROLL, JUDGE PRESIDING
M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
In May 2005, appellant Raymond Fernandez was placed on deferred adjudication supervision after he pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual assault. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.021 (West Supp. 2006). In September 2006, appellant was adjudged guilty after he pleaded true to some of the violations alleged in a motion to adjudicate. The court sentenced appellant to fifteen years' imprisonment.
Appellant's court-appointed attorney filed a brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988); High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978); Currie v. State, 516 S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Jackson v. State, 485 S.W.2d 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972); Gainous v. State, 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Appellant received a copy of counsel's brief and was advised of his right to examine the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. No pro se brief has been filed.
We have reviewed the record and counsel's brief and agree that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
__________________________________________
David Puryear, Justice
Before Chief Justice Law, Justices Puryear and Henson
Affirmed
Filed: April 20, 2007
Do Not Publish
Document Info
Docket Number： 03-06-00643-CR
Filed Date： 4/20/2007
Precedential Status： Precedential
Modified Date： 9/6/2015